Victorian X-Ray Group Pty Ltd v Malouf t/a Malouf Solicitors (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 887

Victorian X-Ray Group Pty Ltd v Malouf t/a Malouf Solicitors (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 887

The challenged resolutions were inadmissible because the inter-plaintiff resolutions were not relevant and the related-company resolutions contained hearsay representations, were prepared by Mr White in connection with the proceedings after the order permitting further evidence on loss, and were not shown to fall within any admissibility provision of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Procedural Ruling / Further Hearing on Damages Issues; Admissibility Objection to Material in Exhibit N
Outcome
The defendant's admissibility objection was upheld in part; pages 1 to 8 and pages 233 to 275 were ruled inadmissible and struck from Exhibit N.
Legal Topics
['documentary Evidence' 'business Records' 'hearsay' 'admissibility' 'proof of Loss' 'company Resolutions']
['evidence' 'civil Procedure' 'damages'] ['documentary Evidence' 'business Records' 'hearsay' 'admissibility' 'proof of Loss' 'company Resolutions']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Procedural Ruling / Further Hearing on Damages Issues; Admissibility Objection to Material in Exhibit N

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether resolutions of related non-plaintiff companies purporting to evidence liabilities to reimburse those companies were admissible.' 'Whether the resolutions were business records or were prepared for the purpose of, or in connection with, the proceedings.' 'Whether inter-plaintiff resolutions were relevant where the defendant did not require proof of which plaintiff paid which amount.']

Ratio Decidendi

The challenged resolutions were inadmissible because the inter-plaintiff resolutions were not relevant and the related-company resolutions contained hearsay representations, were prepared by Mr White in connection with the proceedings after the order permitting further evidence on loss, and were not shown to fall within any admissibility provision of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

Court Disposition

The defendant's admissibility objection was upheld in part; pages 1 to 8 and pages 233 to 275 were ruled inadmissible and struck from Exhibit N.

Orders

  • ['Pages 1 to 8 and pages 233 to 275 are not admissible.' 'Pages 1 to 8 and pages 233 to 275 are struck from Exhibit N.']